AV wanted for Win95 through to XP Pro

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andy
  • Start date Start date
A

Andy

Recommendations requested for Anti-Virus for small business network
incorporating aprox 25 PCs with mix of 95, 98SE, Millennium, NT4 and XP Pro.
Centralised update management preferred but not essential.

thanks in advance,
 
From: "Andy" <andy@dkw>

| Recommendations requested for Anti-Virus for small business network
| incorporating aprox 25 PCs with mix of 95, 98SE, Millennium, NT4 and XP Pro.
| Centralised update management preferred but not essential.

| thanks in advance,
| --
| Andy



A business still using Win95 ?

You are joking -- Right ?
 
David H. Lipman said:
From: "Andy" <andy@dkw>

| Recommendations requested for Anti-Virus for small business network
| incorporating aprox 25 PCs with mix of 95, 98SE, Millennium, NT4 and XP
Pro.
| Centralised update management preferred but not essential.

| thanks in advance,
| --
| Andy



A business still using Win95 ?

You are joking -- Right ?
Click to expand...
This machine is running dedicated CMM (Co-ordinate Measuring Machine)
software and was supplied by the machine tool manufacturer with the machine.


Andy
 
Recommendations requested for Anti-Virus for small business network
incorporating aprox 25 PCs with mix of 95, 98SE, Millennium, NT4 and XP Pro.
Centralised update management preferred but not essential.

thanks in advance,
Click to expand...

Get rid of the PCs running95/98SE/Millennium/NT4 first.
No current, av program worth its salt will support that combination.
 
This machine is running dedicated CMM (Co-ordinate Measuring Machine)
software and was supplied by the machine tool manufacturer with the machine.
Click to expand...

Get them to update their software or change equipment! Is it necessary
for that machine to be on the network?
 
From: "Pegleg" <[email protected]>


|
| Get rid of the PCs running95/98SE/Millennium/NT4 first.
| No current, av program worth its salt will support that combination.

I agree.
 
Andy said:
Recommendations requested for Anti-Virus for small business
network incorporating aprox 25 PCs with mix of 95, 98SE,
Millennium, NT4 and XP Pro.
Click to expand...

Norton Anti-Virus (NAV) version 2001 or 2002.

Don't let the age of the product fool you. If you install NAV 2001 or
2002, and once you perform the first on-line update, the product will
update itself with the latest scan engine and virus definition files.

NAV 2001 and 2002 have very small resource utilization, unlike newer
versions.

I have used NAV 2002 on all the OS's you have listed except win-95 and
win-me, but I expect it to work on those as well.

NAV 2001 or 2002 is available on a stand-alone product, or as part of
Norton System Works (NSW) 2001 and 2002. They are available on
torrents, p2p, etc.

The product does not require registration or validation to be
functional or to update itself.

Once installed, the product will begin a 1 year (365 day) countdown at
which point it will tell you to purchase an additional year of update
service, which you can avoid by un-installing and re-installing the
product and obtain another year of update service.
Centralised update management preferred but not essential.
Click to expand...

You can configure the product to seek out and install updates on a
schedule.
 
David said:
From: "Andy" <andy@dkw>

| Recommendations requested for Anti-Virus for small business network
| incorporating aprox 25 PCs with mix of 95, 98SE, Millennium, NT4 and XP Pro.
| Centralised update management preferred but not essential.

| thanks in advance,
| --
| Andy



A business still using Win95 ?

You are joking -- Right ?
Click to expand...

I was a little startled by it needing an anti virus, but if it was
isolated:

http://www.litepc.com/
 
Norton Anti-Virus (NAV) version 2001 or 2002.

Don't let the age of the product fool you. If you install NAV 2001 or
2002, and once you perform the first on-line update, the product will
update itself with the latest scan engine and virus definition files.
Click to expand...

NAV has hosed more systems than any other AV application. Use at your
own risk...especially on the wreck of a system you have.
 
'Andy' wrote:
| This machine is running dedicated CMM (Co-ordinate Measuring Machine)
| software and was supplied by the machine tool manufacturer with the
machine
_____

Any critical systems that MUST run on an obsolete operating system because
of propriety software should either be disconnected from any network OR if a
Local Area Network connection is a requirement then the systems should be
kept behind a security server that creates a DMZ. This will make these
systems AND the more up-to-date systems on other Local Area Networks more
secure.

For a machine tool controller application that runs on hardware that
supports Windows 95 you should also be in discussion with the provider about
onward migration.

Phil Weldon

|
|
| | > From: "Andy" <andy@dkw>
| >
| > | Recommendations requested for Anti-Virus for small business network
| > | incorporating aprox 25 PCs with mix of 95, 98SE, Millennium, NT4 and
XP
| > Pro.
| > | Centralised update management preferred but not essential.
| >
| > | thanks in advance,
| > | --
| > | Andy
| >
| >
| >
| > A business still using Win95 ?
| >
| > You are joking -- Right ?
| >
| > --
| > Dave
| > http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
| > http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm
| >
| >
| This machine is running dedicated CMM (Co-ordinate Measuring Machine)
| software and was supplied by the machine tool manufacturer with the
machine.
|
|
| Andy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
Phil Weldon said:
Any critical systems that MUST run on an obsolete operating system because
of propriety software should either be disconnected from any network OR if
a
Local Area Network connection is a requirement then the systems should be
kept behind a security server that creates a DMZ. This will make these
systems AND the more up-to-date systems on other Local Area Networks more
secure.

For a machine tool controller application that runs on hardware that
supports Windows 95 you should also be in discussion with the provider
about
onward migration.
Click to expand...

Hi Phil,

I'm in a similar position to the OP, except the machine isn't connected to
the network. I've been thinking about running the application in a virtual
machine running Win95 on more reliable hardware, would this be possible?
There is no provider anymore and being a very small company having someone
re-write the application isn't feasible.

I know nothing about virtualisation really except having tinkered with
Gentoo running in Microsoft's Virtual PC on my pc at home.

All help appreciated.
 
Phil said:
Any critical systems that MUST run on an obsolete operating
system because of propriety software should either be
disconnected from any network OR if a Local Area Network
connection is a requirement then the systems should be
kept behind a security server that creates a DMZ.
Click to expand...

This is typical IT thinking. This is why IT departments rule
organizations from their underground dungeons. Because they are
allowed to. Because they've got senior administrators wrapped around
their fingers.

Even though they brought XP into their organizations, that faulty
operating system, that abomination, that abortion that called itself
secure.

The truth is that win-9x, that "obsolete" OS, was more secure than
those stupid NT-based OS's turned out to be.
 
Ian said:
I'm in a similar position to the OP, except the machine isn't
connected to the network. I've been thinking about running
the application in a virtual machine running Win95 on more
reliable hardware, would this be possible?
Click to expand...

Are you a sadomasochist?

Have you ever heard of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" ?
 
'Virus Guy' wrote, in part:
| This is typical IT thinking.
_____

Your post misses the point.

Phil Weldon

| Phil Weldon wrote:
|
| > Any critical systems that MUST run on an obsolete operating
| > system because of propriety software should either be
| > disconnected from any network OR if a Local Area Network
| > connection is a requirement then the systems should be
| > kept behind a security server that creates a DMZ.
|
| This is typical IT thinking. This is why IT departments rule
| organizations from their underground dungeons. Because they are
| allowed to. Because they've got senior administrators wrapped around
| their fingers.
|
| Even though they brought XP into their organizations, that faulty
| operating system, that abomination, that abortion that called itself
| secure.
|
| The truth is that win-9x, that "obsolete" OS, was more secure than
| those stupid NT-based OS's turned out to be.
 
'Offbreed' wrote:
| Which is what?
_____

Evidently, for the original poster, the system running Windows 95 is a
machine controller running proprietary software. At a certain point new
computers may no longer run the software, the operating system, and possibly
the interface. Machine tool control involves a lot of sharp metal moving at
high speeds ... errors can be catastrophic. The 'Virus Guy' post is a
misaimed rant.

Phil Weldon

| Phil Weldon wrote:
| > 'Virus Guy' wrote, in part:
| > | This is typical IT thinking.
| > _____
| >
| > Your post misses the point.
|
 
Virus Guy said:
Are you a sadomasochist?

Have you ever heard of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" ?
Click to expand...

But it WILL get to a point where it is broke and we'll be stuffed. That's
why I would like to explore virtualisation on modern hardware now - it's
called contingency planning.
 
Back
Top